[GaxoxG] BOUNDARIES OF NEW BRUNSWICK 331 
who with Addington and Grant in England, prepared a convention 
which was completed in 1827, and formally ratified in 1828. It pro- 
vided that as the documents in the case were “so voluminous and 
complicated as to render it improbable that any sovereign or state 
would be willing or able to undertake the office of investigating and 
arbitrating upon them,” it was agreed to substitute for them “new 
and separate statements of the respective cases, severally drawn up by 
each of the contracting parties in such forms and terms as each shall 
see fit.’ The statements so prepared were to be submitted by each 
party to the other, and each would have the right to prepare a definitive 
reply, thus making two documents for each side. As to maps, it was 
provided that the only ones that could be submitted as official were 
Mitchell’s map of 1755, admitted to have been used by the negotiators, 
and Map A, accepted by the commissioners under the Fifth Article 
of the Treaty of Ghent and showing the extent of the claim of each 
nation, though other maps might be submitted in illustration of par- 
ticular points ; and there were other provisions of minor importance 
which the interested reader may trace in the summary of the conven- 
tion given by Moore! The King of the Netherlands was agreed upon 
as arbitrator. 
The preparation of the statements to be laid before the King of 
the Netherlands, as arbitrator, was at once begun. That of the United 
States was prepared by Albert Gallatin, the able jurist and diplomatist, 
aided by Wm. P. Preble, a citizen of Maine. There are references to 
Gallatin’s labors on this work, to which he devoted two years of close 
labor, in Adam’s “Writings of Gallatin,” cited by Moore. The British 
statement was apparently prepared by Henry U. Addington and 
William Huskisson, both prominent in the public service in England 
at that time,? and of course they had the aid of Ward Chipman, jr. 
We obtain a most interesting sidelight upon this question in the fol- 
lowing extract from a letter of Addington to Chipman, of Dee. 21, 
1828, the original of which is in possession of Rev. W. O. Raymond :— 
I have perused Mr. Strachay’s papers, which only go to prove extreme 
debility and precipitation on the part of the ministry and idiotic imbecility 
on the part of Mr. Oswald. It is rather hard to find oneself called upon to 
make good flaws left in the original Treaty by the incapacity or dishonesty 
of the Butchers concerned in it and illimitably deteriorated by subsequent 
proceedings. However, we must do our best, and it is fortunate we have 
at least a basis of truth and justice to work upon. 

1 Arbitrations, 88, 89. The convention itself is in State Papers, VI., 700, 
and letters and other papers relating thereto are in the same volume. 
? Parishes in Kent and Gloucester (now Restigouche) Counties were 
named for them in 1826. 
